DTH on the term "Student-Athlete"

[CrazyNotCrazie]

The Daily Tar Heel will no longer be using the term "student-athlete," admitting that their school in particularly failed at maintaining this model.

https://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/student-athlete-term-editorial

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The Daily Tar Heel will no longer be using the term "student-athlete," admitting that their school in particularly failed at maintaining this model.

https://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/student-athlete-term-editorial

I respect that honesty.

[dukelifer]

The Daily Tar Heel will no longer be using the term "student-athlete," admitting that their school in particularly failed at maintaining this model.

https://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/student-athlete-term-editorial

I understand the sentiment but there are a lot of athletes in other sports- field hockey, track and field, volleyball, fencing etc who are not generating millions for their school and are for the most part, student-athletes reflecting their challenge of balancing both aspects of their lives. Perhaps the term is not is not needed- but one could also call other performers- student-musicians or student-actors - those who do take classes while engaged in another time consuming activity.

[uh_no]

I understand the sentiment but there are a lot of athletes in other sports- field hockey, track and field, volleyball, fencing etc who are not generating millions for their school and are for the most part, student-athletes reflecting their challenge of balancing both aspects of their lives. Perhaps the term is not is not needed- but one could also call other performers- student-musicians or student-actors - those who do take classes while engaged in another time consuming activity.

I like to imagine the DTH was speaking about the accuracy of the term in their specific case, which we all know to be farcial.

[53n206]

Article is brief; to the point; worth reading, Kudos to the staff at DTH.

[Tooold]

Interesting that, while referring to the fact that the “student” part of “student athlete” may be a misrepresentation (and admitting to their own part in that misrepresentation), the article denounces the use of the term for almost the opposite reason... not becasue they aren’t being students, but because they aren’t being treated like professional athletes. “The NCAA used the phrase ‘student athlete’...to avoid paying athletes, to control their name, image and likeness rights, and to deny them the ability to unionize”.

So while the DTH has decided not to use the term “Student athlete”, they are doing so (IMO) with an air of superiority...as is “we at the DTH recognize that our athletes are not being afforded the rights and respect that professionals deserve, so we are going to take a stand and not continue to allow the NCAA to diminish their professional stature with this term.”

[TKG]

Asked to comment, Roy Williams states, ‘“ I have been saying that at Ram’s Club meetings ( and on the recruiting trail) for years.”

[1991 duke law]

Asked to comment, Roy Williams states, ‘“ I have been saying that at Ram’s Club meetings ( and on the recruiting trail) for years.”

In the last five or so years, can we lay claim to any greater a student focus with respect to the basketball team than Carolina? While there is little doubt that Coach K can herald the incredible academic opportunities at Duke, I am becoming increasingly sceptical that the top recruits view this as a meaningful criteria in their attending and choosing a school. I do believe that it was relevant to Hill, the Plumlees, Kelly, DeLaurier and others. But many (Bagly, Williamson, Giles, Okafor, Ingram, and others) - not so much. We have morphed into something of an NBA gateway school - like Kentucky. Which is not necessarily a terrible thing.

That said, I do believe that Coach K does take academics seriously and wants his players to follow this path. And while winning is paramount, I do believe he sees the kids as ‘student athletes’ - and I hope that he takes the view that the “student” comes first. He may not, but I hope that he does.

[duke79]

In the last five or so years, can we lay claim to any greater a student focus with respect to the basketball team than Carolina? While there is little doubt that Coach K can herald the incredible academic opportunities at Duke, I am becoming increasingly sceptical that the top recruits view this as a meaningful criteria in their attending and choosing a school. I do believe that it was relevant to Hill, the Plumlees, Kelly, DeLaurier and others. But many (Bagly, Williamson, Giles, Okafor, Ingram, and others) - not so much. We have morphed into something of an NBA gateway school - like Kentucky. Which is not necessarily a terrible thing.

That said, I do believe that Coach K does take academics seriously and wants his players to follow this path. And while winning is paramount, I do believe he sees the kids as ‘student athletes’ - and I hope that he takes the view that the “student” comes first. He may not, but I hope that he does.

I like to see Duke teams win as much as anyone (in basketball and other sports) BUT your statement above (bolded) does NOT make me feel good about Duke University. I'm not naive and I understand what goes on in many Division 1 sports (frankly, I was never that worked up about the long-time academic scandal at UNC; it did not surprise me in the least that that might be occurring at a Div. 1 school). No doubt many of the top HS BB players view Duke as a one-year training ground for their NBA careers (and, for the record, I have always believed that the NBA should do away with the OAD rule) and I'm guessing that the "academics" are almost meaningless to them. I can't help but feel that Duke, to a small degree, has sold its soul to have championship BB teams.

[1991 duke law]

I like to see Duke teams win as much as anyone (in basketball and other sports) BUT your statement above (bolded) does NOT make me feel good about Duke University. I'm not naive and I understand what goes on in many Division 1 sports (frankly, I was never that worked up about the long-time academic scandal at UNC; it did not surprise me in the least that that might be occurring at a Div. 1 school). No doubt many of the top HS BB players view Duke as a one-year training ground for their NBA careers (and, for the record, I have always believed that the NBA should do away with the OAD rule) and I'm guessing that the "academics" are almost meaningless to them. I can't help but feel that Duke, to a small degree, has sold its soul to have championship BB teams.

I cannot disagree with your sentiment or conclusion.

[johnb]

The DTH makes the excellent point that the concept of “student-athlete” was a way for colleges to bypass legal responsibilities in case of untimely death or severe injury. The concept then became a way for the colleges to prevent these student athletes from making money from their efforts.

It seems like a twisted version of in loco parentis, in which the university cares for its “children” by ensuring meals, shelter, and education, but it then does two things: bypasses long-term financial culpability if someone gets severely injured AND keeps whatever earnings are generated by those “children.”

We’re now seeing this in football, in which there’s an obvious expectation for players to compete in an inevitably contagious sport while increasing numbers of their classmates aren’t allowed to even attend class. Administrators can try to bypass personal/university responsibility by mouthing phrases inked by attorneys (we’re following the medical guidance, and scholarships will be preserved for those opting out), but if there is any medical fall-out from this season, it will be interesting to see how history views the decision makers.

[johnb]

In the last five or so years, can we lay claim to any greater a student focus with respect to the basketball team than Carolina? While there is little doubt that Coach K can herald the incredible academic opportunities at Duke, I am becoming increasingly sceptical that the top recruits view this as a meaningful criteria in their attending and choosing a school. I do believe that it was relevant to Hill, the Plumlees, Kelly, DeLaurier and others. But many (Bagly, Williamson, Giles, Okafor, Ingram, and others) - not so much. We have morphed into something of an NBA gateway school - like Kentucky. Which is not necessarily a terrible thing.

That said, I do believe that Coach K does take academics seriously and wants his players to follow this path. And while winning is paramount, I do believe he sees the kids as ‘student athletes’ - and I hope that he takes the view that the “student” comes first. He may not, but I hope that he does.

One nit (tho maybe there’s no disagreement): I don’t believe that there’s an obvious academic/nonacademic split in terms of who these people are as people/students. There’s the top 5 hs player since 2010 and everybody else. For people who are recent top 5 players, most should, imho, go pro ASAP. I believe our guys when they say they’d love to stay at Duke but can’t. I’m more skeptical about the academic interest of a few Duke lesser-ranked oad’s who didn’t make your list, but I’m also aware that I was listening to them at age 19 while they were essentially on a multi-month NBA job interview in which dedication to basketball trumped everything else.

Ie, when I look at our elite b-ball players, I see elites in other profitable professions who are academically smart, laser focused, and willing to bypass college to pursue their passion. In Zion’s case, I might see Lady Gaga (who dropped out of NYU at 19) or Taylor Swift (who graduated from hs a year early with no intention of college). Given their relative weights, Zion=Gaga+Taylor+ McCauley Culinary in the first Home Alone.

Similarly, specialists from non-lucrative areas also pick their colleges based on individual coaches/teachers/programs rather than a US News overall academic ranking. It may be weird for most of us non-specialists to see a basketball recruit’s motley college list, and it doesn’t take Alan Turing to decode the meaning. But I really do think that there are the equivalent motley lists for people interested in astronomy, agriculture, drama, oceanography, and violin (to take a few examples of specialties where the very best specialty hs students would generally attend a less generally “prestigious” school than Duke).

FWIW, I don’t think it hurts Duke to be seen as the home of super elite basketball players who stay for just a year; they’re uniformly great Duke emissaries. I just find it kinda boring to watch a new group every year, but that’s my problem, not Brandon Ingram’s.

[cspan37421]

The DTH makes the excellent point that the concept of “student-athlete” was a way for colleges to bypass legal responsibilities in case of untimely death or severe injury. The concept then became a way for the colleges to prevent these student athletes from making money from their efforts.


I've not read the DTH editorial, so IDK about your first sentence here, but I'd like to inquire about the second one. While I don't doubt that a school is happy to reap near-100% of the value of fielding college sports teams that people want to watch in person and on TV, could not at least some of the motivation for not paying college athletes be to avoid a bidding war for talent and establish some sort of competitive balance? Granted, the cost (if not the value as well) of a Duke education is greater than that of many schools, so the playing field is already somewhat unlevel. However, that difference is pretty small potatoes compared to what it would cost on the open market to yield recruiting classes like the ones we are used to.

Winning a college championship simply because you can fund a more highly-paid team is hardly surprising, and as a result, a little less impressive of a feat. Probably there'd be fewer Cinderella stories, diamonds in the rough, etc. If you think that there's little upward mobility in programs now, I suspect it would be even worse under a bidding system, unless one were able to stratify colleges into divisions based on payroll, keeping like-funded teams together and competing with each other (only).

Anyway, I do agree with you that it's going to be interesting to see how college FB plays out, not just epidemiologically, but legally as well.

[jimmymax]

If demand for Bowl games and a Final Four pushes some college sports to go the way of the NBA bubble, it'll be hard for me to consider these kids even "athlete-students." Blow up the NCAA, lure high level athletes and well paid coaches into "sports only" schools with no academics, for kids that intend to make athletics a career. You could even pay the kids, perhaps the equivalent of the free-ride they get now. Sports schools could be affiliated with existing colleges with a separate application policy, like an engineering school, so the existing colleges can siphon off some of the profits. Regular colleges would return to tiny sports budgets with four-year student first, athlete second participants -- like intramurals. A lot of this is already happening, this would formalize it.